The clear bill has entered a crucial countdown moment. Early this morning, the Republican Party in the Senate released the final revised text of the clear bill, calling it the "last, best, and final" offer to the Democratic Party. The core changes include: 1) Trump agrees to about 80% of Tillis Gallego's ethical proposal, which requires officials to strip off "substantial" encryption related interests or put blind faith, and allows state attorneys general to participate in its execution; 2) BRCA narrows down to bank secrecy law and civil safe harbor, removing some criminal protections; 3) The "circuit breaker mechanism" arbitrated by Minister of Finance Bessent to increase the returns of stablecoins and prevent large-scale loss of community bank deposits; 4) The agricultural sector will strengthen restrictions on vertical integration, related party transactions, and conflicts of interest, and clarify that state consumer protection laws still apply. The Republican Party stated that the text has incorporated 126 modifications requested by the Democratic Party. Looking closely at the Republican Party's actions today, they are actually cutting the three reasons for opposing votes one by one: the ethical enforcement that the Democratic Party wants, the deposit protection that banks want, and the criminal space that law enforcement wants. Then shift the blame back and say, 'If you change what the Democratic Party wants, you can vote against it tomorrow, which means you don't want the US digital asset rules.' However, this text has only been implemented for a few hours and the key Democrats have not yet signed it: 1) Gallego and Alsobrooks are the only two cross party votes in the committee, and they have always emphasized ethics before; 2) Warner, Cortez Masto, Booker, and others have previously jointly stated that the old draft is not enough. The key is to see what these people will say before tomorrow's vote, which is more crucial than Lummis' new proposal. Of course, the later time rhythm is more important: 1. Tomorrow (September 15th) at 2:15 PM Eastern Time, the Senate will conduct a procedural vote on the "Start Deliberation of the Bill" for the Cloth, requiring 60 votes. This is not a final approval, but a decision on whether to proceed to formal review; Once passed, it only means that the Senate agrees to bring it up for discussion. Then enter the stage of debate and possible revisions; Afterwards, it is usually necessary to propose a new clone of the bill itself to end the debate, and then conduct a final full house vote (usually only a simple majority is required after the clone). The Senate has plenty of time in September. 2. But the House of Representatives is very tight in September This week, the House of Representatives only has about 4 voting days. They will leave around the 17th, and the votes on the 21st and 28th will be cancelled. The next formal meeting will be held after the midterm elections. The Senate version is no longer the same as the original version of the House of Representatives in 2025, and the House of Representatives must vote again - either directly agree, make changes back and forth, or open a negotiating committee. So even if the Senate completes the entire process this week, the probability of the bill being sent to the White House in September is very low; 3. Next up is from the midterm elections until January 3, 27 The original members of parliament are still serving in this parliament and have not yet dispersed. Clear bills do not need to be reintroduced and can continue to be reconciled. But after January 3, 2027, when the new Congress meets, any bills that fail will be invalidated and must be reintroduced. 4. So after clarifying the bill, there are several possible scenarios 1) The first option is that 60 votes are not enough tomorrow. Today's new text has made significant concessions, but the Democratic Party is still not satisfied, and the Republican Party does not guarantee full attendance. This vote is yellow. The legislative window for 2026 is basically closed, and the next step is for the new Congress to reintroduce proposals and go through the process again. The market structure continues to rely on regulatory patches to promote; 2) The second option is for the clone to pass, and the final vote in the Senate will also be passed. But the House of Representatives will have to wait until the lame duck session (after the midterm elections until January 3, 2022), which is currently the closest path to "still alive": The Senate's approval will be seen as a major signal, but the completion of the law is still far from being signed by the House of Representatives and the President. The election results will change the pricing: The structure of the two houses remains unchanged, and the reconciliation will be faster; If the Senate changes hands, there may be another round of code and game between ethical and illegal financial provisions. 3) The third option is for the Senate to pass and the House of Representatives to approve it directly in December, with the President signing it. The shortest path and the most tense time: We need to conclude the debate within a few days after September 15th and also make room for encryption within the funding deadline. There is a possibility, but it is difficult to be a high probability scenario. 4) The fourth type is actually a worsening version of the second type, which has been passed by the Senate, stalled in the House of Representatives for reconsideration, and more importantly, the year-end appropriations bill. Delaying the clear bill until 2027 means starting over. It's almost the same as the first one.